MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224096027 · doi:10.1101/2022.04.13.22273825

Effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against hospitalization and death in Canada: A multiprovincial test-negative design study

2022· preprint· en· W4224096027 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Sharifa Nasreen, Yossi Febriani, Héctor Alexander Velásquez García, Geng Zhang, Mina Tadrous, Sarah A. Buchan, Christiaan H. Righolt, Salaheddin M. Mahmud, Naveed Z. Janjua, Mel Krajden, Gaston De Serres, Jeffrey C. Kwong

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkUniversité LavalBC Centre for Disease ControlCentre for Advancing Health OutcomesSt. Paul's HospitalWomen's College HospitalInstitut National de Santé Publique du QuébecUniversity of ManitobaPublic Health OntarioUniversity of British ColumbiaCentre hospitalier de l'Université LavalInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesUniversity of Toronto
FundersDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, University of TorontoCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanadian Immunization Research NetworkUniversity of TorontoPublic Health AgencyPublic Health Agency of Canada
KeywordsMedicineLogistic regressionVaccinationCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Retrospective cohort studyInternal medicineImmunologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Background A major goal of COVID-19 vaccination is to prevent severe outcomes (hospitalizations and deaths). We estimated the effectiveness of mRNA and ChAdOx1 COVID-19 vaccines against severe outcomes in four Canadian provinces between December 2020 and September 2021. Methods We conducted this multiprovincial retrospective test-negative study among community-dwelling adults aged ≥18 years in Ontario, Quebec, British Columbia, and Manitoba using linked provincial databases and a common study protocol. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate province-specific vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 hospitalization and/or death. Estimates were pooled using random effects models. Results We included 2,508,296 tested subjects, with 31,776 COVID-19 hospitalizations and 5,842 deaths. Vaccine effectiveness was 83% after a first dose, and 98% after a second dose, against both hospitalization and death (separately). Against severe outcomes (hospitalization or death), effectiveness was 87% (95%CI: 71%–94%) ≥84 days after a first dose of mRNA vaccine, increasing to 98% (95%CI: 96%–99%) ≥112 days after a second dose. Vaccine effectiveness against severe outcomes for ChAdOx1 was 88% (95%CI: 75%–94%) ≥56 days after a first dose, increasing to 97% (95%CI: 91%–99%) ≥56 days after a second dose. Lower one-dose effectiveness was observed for adults aged ≥80 years and those with comorbidities, but effectiveness became comparable after a second dose. Two doses of vaccines provided very high protection for both homologous and heterologous schedules, and against Alpha, Gamma, and Delta variants. Conclusions Two doses of mRNA or ChAdOx1 vaccines provide excellent protection against severe outcomes of hospitalization and death.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.182

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.296 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchFrench-language works237,207